[{"_1":2,"_98":-5,"_99":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6089641,"mediaKeyId","2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e","parentId",2872240,"title","Builders association proposal for new R-1C zone moves forward after staff, fire and city review","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",2827000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e&start=2827&end=2827","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e/thumbnail_2827000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6089641/Tippecanoe-County/Indiana/Builders-association-proposal-for-new-R-1C-zone-moves-forward-after-staff-fire-and-city-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089641-2be7bf70d6161998b0cff89141dea87c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148314&Signature=KyU2giYEAC6Fp4Mbo8LMtau0P6ThLf-CohatulBtk57xoIijxqKR9Ws2bRIGPa-1XZwczf7XcGPQx-u6UO~mlg0kyqiK~29UlhVlLLmXfcZz5pU65imXK7uXZb17S6WVm94WEd5d9IjDO3HsP51XEmCvL-WcTJ~Wuvm9redF~3awlMaO50E8OKoJ~meSAJGkBGrFErmfb68vH-P18xwvEmLmgQx6cCZnJMuGmqXBCwrvW80IXKvo0kRwyUuabXX4R5tdzNfCTrHTwDuBbyLqQz0DQWlEbJoOtZKUVc9mZe0tP8vwitya2UBaFoG~259IEVdgpgouhTh0z7rkZy-PWQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Tippecanoe County IN","date","2025-04-03T09:30:00Z","article","A proposal to add a new R-1C zoning classification—intended to allow owner‑occupied single‑family detached homes on narrower lots—advanced in discussion at the April 2 ordinance committee meeting after staff and public stakeholders reviewed a draft developed with the builders association.

Steve Schreckengas, who described the proposal and outreach work, said the draft would allow 40‑foot wide lots to accommodate single‑family detached homes that sit between typical R-1B lots and townhouse zones. \"The intent is to have single family detached homes on a smaller lot, with the intent of owner occupied detached homes,\" Schreckengas said. He told the committee staff and public‑safety stakeholders met and agreed on most items during a March 17 workshop.

One notable change from the builders' draft was a shift from 5‑foot side yards to 6‑foot side yards to satisfy fire‑department concerns. \"One item we agreed to was 6 foot side yards instead of 5 foot side yards,\" Schreckengas said. Committee members and staff noted that moving to 6‑foot side yards aligns the new classification with other local zoning standards and avoids incorporating building‑code elements such as fire‑rated assemblies into the zoning ordinance.

The draft also removes references to rear‑alley or rear‑load garage language so that rear‑load development would be considered through PD or other planning processes rather than being prescriptive in the base district. Conversations with both Lafayette and West Lafayette fire departments, county building officials, and economic development representatives informed the revisions, and staff said a follow‑up debrief with those parties indicated no unresolved objections.

Staff reported the item would be on the ordinance committee agenda the next day for further review; if the final draft is acceptable to the safety and permitting stakeholders, staff expects to present the zoning text at the May ordinance committee and move it forward to the APC process thereafter. \"If it's good, then will it be on the, May's ordinance committee meeting? I don't see why not,\" one staff member said. Advocates said the classification aims to provide another tool to produce lower‑cost single‑family housing without requiring a planned development.

The committee did not finalize text at the meeting but agreed to continue coordination with public‑safety reviewers and circulate the draft to legislative bodies; staff will notify committee members of any changes and plan to present a final draft at the May ordinance committee meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Tippecanoe County, Indiana APC Exec/Ordinance Committee 2025 04 02","oneSentenceSummary","A proposal to create an R-1C zoning classification for narrower single‑family detached lots advanced in ordinance committee discussion; the draft increases minimum side-yard setbacks to 6 feet (from 5) following fire-department input and removes rear‑alley language, with staff planning to present a final draft to the ordinance committee for May.","taxTitle","Tippecanoe County, Indiana","taxId",5747,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6089646,"Ordinance committee reviews expansion of courthouse-proximate/Upper Main Street zone, discusses nonconforming residences and owner notification",1373,1378000,2751000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e&start=1378&end=2751","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e/thumbnail_1378000.jpg","/articles/6089646/Tippecanoe-County/Indiana/Ordinance-committee-reviews-expansion-of-courthouse-proximateUpper-Main-Street-zone-discusses-nonconforming-residences-and-owner-notification","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089646-14866510d5bbf86619bf0ed97768166e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148314&Signature=N9odlBzdwp5qGncJ0h3hBVE6-YFIHBAPy4WCpJLoaU7XZbXUgFz1upMEzvGS~pZ2FGTFYrxfhHhRdhXDpr3GC4bXiwThwe2Mv7H6WFZkqjhHghKhV5qX2CLk-dIpZ4vRwtgxidlfY6zpUovYOSkGm4vYPxRjoGxEStGwmXnMLC7TCTwopJMSX0KaYbF2LjZIzUenMpWmZ~MddjQSTzYjJSGv6DAQC0ovf27VEPEJyDux~3TRBuMjJhn9XOW5tKWgiLWiu~75fnxHwIHA4WB2~1JfGuAWVF~fneFj6nWIPjuC-Ky9RMXddGdCwvJ5fv~BRsGYmrDgVD-4ZrME7-1nVw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Ordinance committee members on April 2 reviewed a proposed amendment to the downtown Central Business District that would expand the area designated as the courthouse-proximate and Upper Main Street zone one block to the south. Staff said the change would map the overlay rather than rely on a lengthy definition in the ordinance and would continue to prohibit most first‑floor residences in the expanded area, with specific historic purpose‑built residential properties exempted.

\"With the 1998 adoption of the zoning ordinance, there was an area put in there as, called courthouse proximate and Upper Main Street area,\" a staff presenter said, explaining that the overlay has traditionally prohibited first‑floor residences except in limited circumstances and that the proposed amendment would clarify the area by creating a map. Staff noted two purpose‑built residential properties dating from the late 1800s that would be exempt from the overlay.

Dennis Carson, Economic Development Director, attended and said he was available to answer questions. Committee members, residents and staff discussed which properties would become nonconforming under the expanded boundary, what triggers loss of grandfathered status, and whether owners should be notified before the matter reaches city council. One committee member summarized the practical triggers for losing grandfathering: vacancy or damage greater than 50 percent; staff confirmed that demolitions or damage beyond that threshold would remove nonconforming status.

Several speakers raised concerns about imposing nonconforming status on buildings whose owners had invested in repairs and maintenance. A resident asked whether the Lahr Building and other downtown apartments would be forced to convert; staff and committee members said existing residential uses would remain lawful so long as they continue in use, but that the overlay would make them nonconforming going forward. \"They're still intending to rent them as residences, and we're perfectly fine with that,\" a staff member said.

Committee members discussed outreach and timing. City staff committed to notifying the specific property owners identified as nonconforming and to discussing the boundary with city council; the committee agreed to forward the proposal to the April APC public hearing agenda and to the May APC meeting with the understanding that city council can adopt, modify or exclude parcels. \"I would commit to notifying them and talking to them,\" Dennis Carson said of affected property owners.

The committee also discussed how practical issues such as financing and insurance market responses can affect owners of nonconforming properties, noting that banks and insurers increasingly consider nonconformity when underwriting. Staff emphasized that the zoning rules and state code limit certain remedies (for example, APCs cannot grant use variances) and that adjustments generally require map or ordinance amendments through the legislative process.

The ordinance committee voted to send the proposed expansion forward for APC consideration and agreed to place the item on the May APC meeting agenda after providing notification to the identified property owners. The committee said city council ultimately decides legislative changes and can amend the proposal after receiving input at public hearings.","City staff proposed expanding the courthouse-proximate/Upper Main Street zoning overlay slightly south; ordinance committee and local speakers discussed impacts on downtown first-floor residential units, grandfathering rules, and notifying affected property owners before the proposal goes to APC and city council.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6089651,"Tippecanoe APC executive committee approves subdivision extensions, placements and budget report",965,199000,1164000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e&start=199&end=1164","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2872240-bfa4f721d7f220f26f261e8d30a2463e/thumbnail_199000.jpg","/articles/6089651/Tippecanoe-County/Indiana/Tippecanoe-APC-executive-committee-approves-subdivision-extensions-placements-and-budget-report","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6089651-a2f2f2b44eb6b72105e0ae0436c7f120/orig.mp4?Expires=1771148314&Signature=oXA9Dssm1rbRN3Fqj68cgv0z2ZJa9S5sxBQ8GvFgBS98XoCwlNi7-aUELSX67D4ou63HQdwIkB0FKM4fYhaiZp9v9zdH7sxZ5wEfh63m8JQ4XGKGhT5QAwQ3JRVxqIHBiuLLBFZkxfmNR--4I6t76r3f4dJVwFXbf05NJEN6ivQ1B26DDDKejI-n60vtEnYzp2LXer6NPUXmbEdTpZAiqyhFhtDHMho3te3qX4dpeZpkWg4RxzmPUFdwE7NXwouMKYnUPzj31iGFdLiwxNB8bPb0R8aKzDTyW6r9bAb~7nAiDHmV~S9ZHug-mG5jcaEKOHF-p6l7u60T5H7MY8VP6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Tippecanoe County Area Plan Commission executive committee on April 2 authorized a belated subdivision extension for S-3269, Rainy Brook Subdivision Part 2, Section 2, approved a primary-approval extension for the same section, adopted Resolution PD 2504 for a common-area lot in a phase of a residential project, placed multiple petitions and rezones on upcoming public agendas, and accepted the March 2025 budget report.

The committee first voted to authorize a belated subdivision extension request and to hear the primary approval extension for S-3269, Rainy Brook Subdivision Part 2, Section 2, after staff explained the original primary approval had expired in February 2024 and recommended approval to allow the developer to finish the 14 lots in that section. \"So, approving this extension request will allow them to finish that part of the subdivision,\" staff said. Tim Balenci, representing T Bird Design, told the committee the plans are complete and that \"we do expect it to happen in the next 2 years.\" The committee approved the request by unanimous ballot.

The committee also reheard and approved Resolution PD 2504 after a 30-day recording-period lapse required re-approval by ordinance. Staff described PD 2504 as establishing the common-area lot for the phase so clearing, grading and infrastructure work can continue; unit lots will be created later as amended plats after foundations are in place. Staff said the project remains unchanged and includes 18 units in a mix of single‑ and attached dwellings; the petitioner agreed with staff recommendations and the committee recorded a unanimous approval.

Several other procedural items were approved or continued during the meeting. The committee moved multiple petitions and rezoning requests onto the April and May public hearing agendas for the Area Plan Commission and the Board of Zoning Appeals, and it continued S-5262 (Winborne Bridal Estate preliminary) to the May 7, 2025 executive committee hearing to allow the petitioner to file for a subdivision variance request. The committee also conditionally approved minor-subdivision sketch S-5250 (EAB pause subdivision) with eight conditions and placed numerous rezone petitions on the April 16 APC public hearing agenda.

On finance, the committee approved the March 2025 budget report as submitted. Staff noted that with the new zoning enforcement inspector hired in February, enforcement cases are moving at a faster pace and some are advancing into legal actions; staff said the legal-services budget may be drawn on and could require an increase if trends continue.

Votes at a glance: committee members moved and seconded the measures throughout the meeting; where recorded, ballots were unanimous. Several motions were carried without full roll-call tallies recorded in the transcript. The committee adjourned at the close of its executive committee business.

The committee's approvals set multiple items for forthcoming public hearings and continued one preliminary sketch to May for additional petitioner filings.","At its April 2, 2025 executive committee meeting, the Tippecanoe County Area Plan Commission voted to authorize a belated extension and a primary extension for the Rainy Brook subdivision, approved Resolution PD 2504 and several other routine agenda placements, and accepted the March budget report.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Builders association proposal for new R-1C zone moves forward after staff, fire and city review

Ordinance committee reviews expansion of courthouse-proximate/Upper Main Street zone, discusses nonconforming residences and owner notification

Tippecanoe APC executive committee approves subdivision extensions, placements and budget report